Talk:Vellos Family/Onliana/The Summa
Ummm... jousting has nothing to do with leisure or fun. It's how well you wield a lance, riding a horse ;) -Marouane 10:58, 16 September 2006 (CEST)
- I don't get that. Jousting, in medieval times, was pretty much the definition of what was fun. --The1exile 11:17, 16 September 2006 (CEST)
- Maybe for the winner of the joust. I don't see much fun in taking a solid wooden lance to the face and falling off a horse in 60 pounds worth of armor :D Oh, the humiliation! -Marouane 15:24, 16 September 2006 (CEST)
- Maybe you don't, but it is what all the peasant kids would do. Also, usually it wouldn't be to the face as you'd have a helmet that would deflect most blows. --The1exile 16:16, 16 September 2006 (CEST)
- Jousting, I can say from personal experince, is loads of fun. And tournaments were big events, and I use jousting as representative of tournaments and festivals, since they involved jousting tourneys. The joust is the classic high middle ages symbol of festivity. Vellos 16:25, 16 September 2006 (CEST)
- True, but these aren't the middle ages, it's BM, and in BM, jousting is a combat skill trained by wielding a lance on the back of a horse. It is only used for one purpose: advancing in the jousting competiton of a tournament.-Marouane 17:07, 16 September 2006 (CEST)
- Jousting, I can say from personal experince, is loads of fun. And tournaments were big events, and I use jousting as representative of tournaments and festivals, since they involved jousting tourneys. The joust is the classic high middle ages symbol of festivity. Vellos 16:25, 16 September 2006 (CEST)
- Maybe you don't, but it is what all the peasant kids would do. Also, usually it wouldn't be to the face as you'd have a helmet that would deflect most blows. --The1exile 16:16, 16 September 2006 (CEST)
- Maybe for the winner of the joust. I don't see much fun in taking a solid wooden lance to the face and falling off a horse in 60 pounds worth of armor :D Oh, the humiliation! -Marouane 15:24, 16 September 2006 (CEST)
The Blackest Pen's thoughts on the Summa
You cant agree on the meaning of a joust...How can you attempt to write a book that holds all the common ehtical goodness of man? You find this task to be a whimsical one...you have planned nothing in your work...you simply produce this child of your mind to counter our book of truest evils. A shame that good has nothing to do with your evil work of pure darkness.
We all thank you for making the waters of "good" more and more blood filled and silted with mud.
The jousting discussion was OOC, hence using terms like "BM", or "middle ages". But I'll reply to the rest of your message anyways...
Blackest Pen, your words are only so much sound and fury, signifying nothing. Your problem is that you think good people cant disagree. Of course we can disagree. Whether or not one is allowed to drink beer doesnt matter much in the long run. We can disagree on quite alot of things, the simple fact of the matter is that we DO agree on many fundamental things. Like the fact that killing is not good, I believe we all agree killing is not good. Also, I do not claim to hold all "ethical goodness of man". I claim to put forth my ideas in a comprehensive fashion. They are, A- Open to revision, B- Probably not entirely correcy, C- Not all ideas of goodness among people are true. You BCers, amusing enough, consider yourself good. You agree with what you do, you consider yourself good, you merely term your actions, for convenience of us good people, as evil, to prevent confusing symantical debates. Yet you are just like every other ideology that springs up, claiming to be good. You are just another misguided philosophy, which the forces of good must fight against. Vellos 17:30, 16 September 2006 (CEST)
Your book says in three places when and where killing IS good.
Again..you cant even agree with your own works and ideas. This is why we laugh at your hollow attempts. Good day my love.
The Blackest Pen 17:35, 16 September 2006 (CEST)
Please provide quotations. Where is it that it says killing is good? I need to edit that, for that is a miss-phrasing. Killing may be just or necessary, but not good. Morally acceptable perhaps, but not good. Please, provide me with the quotations. Vellos 17:43, 16 September 2006 (CEST)
